AA for us

@avsjerry

"Curious about the success rate is v the blind luck of the draw"

I have a few reviewers I tend to trust. Jay's Iyagi's ears are close to mine. He has made some misguided comments in the past, but overall I trust his commentary. Steve Guttenberg is another reviewer I follow routinely.

Gutenberg is a promoter, not a reviewer, as I read somewhere was his own admission.

His last youtube post about the KLIPSCH OJAS speaker was funny. Unintentionally

Is it possible to be a reviewer without being a promoter?

By which was meant that every reviewer I have encountered is inherently promoting something whether it be in the positive or negative sense.

@bolong From the other angle: I guess you can be a promoter - primarilly, when your review is not focusing on objectivity. You would just say nice things about the product - in a way that you are not lying but not making an effort either.

Real reviews are done in a bubble, usually with products borrowed from a friend and not from the manufacturer .

Whereas when you review and not promote, you are focusing on the product and your methodology, to be transparent and thorough and fair and conclusive, If any of those are missing, it’s a presentation not a review.

If your review is positive, you can be called a promoter but it depends on the context.